Probation requirements

[Gene Garman]

  The free exercise of religion cannot be prohibited, but religion is 
not above the law, except in matters of opinion. The Free Exercise 
Clause does not say the exercise of religion cannot be abridged, which 
means reduced. The Free Exercise Clause plainly says the exercise of 
religion cannot be prohibited, which means totally. All actions are 
subject to the laws of the land which apply to all citizens equally, 
regardless of religion.

In 1879 (Reynolds v. U.S.) wording of the Free Exercise Clause, as 
written, was unanimously understood by the Court :

"Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot 
interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices.
...

"Can a man excuse his practices ... because of his religious belief? To 
permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief 
superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen 
to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under 
such circumstances.
...

"It matters not that his belief was a part of his professed religion; it 
was still belief, and belief only."

The Free Exercise Clause, by its precise wording, is in complete harmony 
with  Reynolds v. U.S. The Free Exercise Clause does not forbid all 
religion exercise, but it is not a license for anarchy; and, it makes no 
exception for anyone. All actions  are subject to rules of conduct 
lawfully established, such as probation rules, regardless of religion 
opinion.

You can also refer to the unanimous decision of Davis v. Beason in 1890.

Gene Garman, M.Div.
America's Real Religion
www.americasrealreligion.org

Samuel V wrote:

>Can anyone point me to an article, preferably available online,
>discussing whether probation requirements violate free exercise?  For
>example, is a free exercise problem created whensuch as when the
>effect of the restriction is to prohibit the probationer to attend the
>church of his choice (because he can't leave town, can't be near
>children, can't be near wine, etc.).
>
>If you'd like to respond offlist, please do so to denversam at gmail.com
>_______________________________________________
>To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20050803/c801e925/attachment.html